Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Garbo - Guiness book of records


Recommended Posts

how many out there know that Garbo was named the most beautiful woman who ever lived in the Guiness Book of Records and also is widely acclaimed at the Face of the Century (last) and also the most photogenic actress ever before the cameras? who could ever top all of that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

she would have to be in the guiness book of records and be named in everything else that MS> GARBO was involved in.................................lamarr also COULD NOT EVEN APPROACH TO ACT.......

 

ALSO, CATCH SOME OF GARBO's silent films, and get some education!

 

Also,

GG had a perfect face, but somehow as she aged, her face grew more prettier.

 

Lamarr aged terribly and was last photograph in court being arrained for shoplifting!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, i saw a pic of Hedy when she was around 70 and i was impressed at how good she looked at 69/70. They're both beautiful in that european, continental way. I think Hedy performed quite well in some of her films, rising above the so-so scripts she was ordered to do. I don't think your statement of "she couldn't even approach to act" is fair or unbiased on your part. Obviously, MGM, King Vidor, and Cecil B. DeMille saw potential in the Austrian Angel. I enjoy Garbo as well and as i see it, there's room for both GG and HL to be top-noth classic beauties and stars. Garbo was great in the underappreciated Susan Lenox.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you sir. Heck, there's room for dozens of classic beauties at the top. There's enough room for everyone's favorites. How cool is it that you have pics of Hedy and Greta up on your wall?? My all-time fave pic of Greta is also the one they put on the U.S. Stamp commemorating her 100th birtday in 2005 (the sultry one where her hair is almost obscuring her left eye). By the way, the pics you post in all these threads of all the classic actresses are really sensational. I've never seen some of the pics before. You are to be commended for having great taste. I love when you surprise me and post pics of my other favorites: Lizabeth, Alexis, Kay, Linda, Constance, ... woo hoo!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gosh, randy, I don't know what to say! I try, in my own small way, to excite and contribute without degradation or insult. There are so many on these boards who try to discover the "truth!" They don't understand that the truth is relative. My truth isn't necessarily your truth. So, being who I am, I truly love all of them. At my age, I have discovered the beauty and value and illusion of all of them, including Joan Crawford, whom I hated most of my life. I have my favorites, but it doesn't blind me to the worth of all of them. They all contributed to the body of film. It is so wonderful to be able to say, "I hate her!" "I love him!" "That was a great film!" "He was a terrible director!" But, all in all, they were ALL fabulous, and I am so grateful to have been able to get to know each one of them, especially GARBO and LAMARR! Ha!

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a good way to look at the situation. Well said. Hedy's been my favorite movie star since 1994. I have an 8x10 of her on my coffee table. Linda Darnell is a close second.

 

Lana was my fave from 1985 to 1990 and Susan H. was my number one from 1990 to 1994.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

hello, she was named that in 1955..............................................ok and it has been reported on her fan club website and various books, and is known as the face of the century!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

Link to post
Share on other sites

miss hedy did very blue pics in europe, one of which is ecstasy...............gg never did those kind of films, her beauty was just classic and pure, there IS NO COMPARISON....incidentally many more people of a younger age know who Garbo is who today, really, even remotely heard of Hedy, only old movie buffs do...........................ok?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don?t think Garbo was ?beautiful? at all. Like Marlene Dietrich, who also was not ?beautiful?, here appeal was based on her exotic theatrical poses, her mannerism, and her exotic voice.

 

Hollywood had many more beautiful women than these two.

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=FredCDobbs wrote:}{quote}

> I dont think Garbo was beautiful at all. Like Marlene Dietrich, who also was not beautiful, here appeal was based on her exotic theatrical poses, her mannerism, and her exotic voice.

>

> Hollywood had many more beautiful women than these two.

 

I think I understand what you're saying, Fred. But wouldn't you also say that the subject of physical beauty is subjective, to some degree? Yes, I can see why for some, Greta and Marlene may not be "conventionally" beautiful. But I see a beauty to them that perhaps does have to do with how they carried and presented themselves. They were also, to a certain extent, creations of the Hollywood system.

 

I also see a great deal of beauty in many character actors, like Thelma Ritter. No, don't laugh, I know she's not "conventionally" beautiful, but I see a certain beauty in her, maybe not a purely physical thing, but the beauty that comes from being someone you enjoy, someone who can perhaps lift up your spirits.

 

I think beauty should be a little more than what Madison Ave. wants us to think of as "beautiful". As much as I admire the conventionally beautiful faces of Hollywood, past and present, I also want to believe that people can be beautiful for attributes that trascend purely physical attributes (and in this day and age, a lot of it is simply the result of plastic surgery!).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fred,

 

Have to agree. Greta wasn't even close to being the most beautiful Silent Film actress. She didn't make my top 10 list, and would have a very tough time cracking the top 20. Renee Adoree and Colleen Moore didn't make the Top 10 either, and I consider both of them to be allot better looking than Garbo.Clara Bow and Lillian Gish were not in my top 10 either. But likely would make the top 20.

 

1930's Dietrich? Who on Earth would pick her over Ginger Rogers? Marlene kind of spooks me with her lack of any bottom eyelashes! Yikes! Must confess, Jean Harlow never did all that much for me either. I don't really find her particularly attractive.

 

In the 40's it's probably Rita Hayworth, and than everybody else. But yes, Hedy Lamarr was certainly very beautiful. Great Underrated beauties how about Gloria DeHaven? No one ever seems to mention her? Eleanor Parker really gets to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I?m probably speaking mainly as a photographer, since I photographed a lot of people in my lifetime, and only occasionally would I get to photograph a really ?beautiful? woman or a very ?handsome? man. And also, I?m talking about ?movie stars?, not average folks we meet every day.

 

To me, the term ?beauty? for a ?movie star? is an incredible face that we (both men and women) like to stare at and study and dream of being young again and married to that person. John Gilbert, for example, when he was young, was naturally a very handsome man. Clara Bow was gorgeous. Of course Hedy Lamar has already been mentioned.

 

I see both Garbo and Dietrich as being basically rather plain looking women ? who actually looked a lot alike and in fact acted alike ? and I think their appeal had to do with the specific mannerisms their early directors taught them to use, and of course their carefully trained voices.

 

Mr. Osborne has told the story about how some studio men were talking about Marlene Dietrich years ago, and Josef von Sternberg was present. Someone said something about Dietrich?s on-screen persona, and Sternberg said something like, ?Gentlemen, I am Marlene Dietrich?, meaning he had created her persona and had turned her into the exotic film character the public went to see on the silver screen. The recent documentary on TCM told about Garbo?s early director who basically did the same thing for her. Several directors tried to do the same for Louise Brooks, but she was too difficult to work with and she wound up making third-rate cowboy movies like ?Empty Sadles? and ?Overland Stage Raiders?.

 

On the other hand, these women had some great natural beauty and their own unique and desirable personal mannerisms. This came first, and then when the make-up and fancy hairdo was added, they became quite outstanding as great beauties. The third on the list, Rochelle Hudson, had great natural beauty, but she never became a great star:

 

http://coosacreek.org/mambo/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/postman.jpg

 

http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~maxineweddell/clara_bow.jpg

 

http://i42.tinypic.com/35hlhmt.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=FredCDobbs wrote:}{quote}

> I see both Garbo and Dietrich as being basically rather plain looking women who actually looked a lot alike and in fact acted alike and I think their appeal had to do with the specific mannerisms their early directors taught them to use, and of course their carefully trained voices.

 

I think you're essentially right, in that a lot of the glamour of early Hollywood was a carefully manufactured illusion. Mind you, I don't think that was a bad thing - many people wanted illusions in their lives, especially during the Great Depression and during World War II.

 

If I'd never heard of Garbo or Dietrich in my life, and I had run into them in some public place when they were in their "prime", and they hadn't been wearing fancy clothes or a lot of make-up, the truth is they probably wouldn't stand out, for me, I guess.

 

And yet, at the same time, when I watch them in the movies I want to buy into the illusion, and want to imagine what it felt like at the time those movies were being released to watch them in the huge palace-like theaters of the time.

 

So, I can see both sides of it I guess. The glamour of old Hollywood is an illusion that, if you want to buy into it, can be a fun distraction, something to take your mind off of other things.

 

I don't for a minute buy the illusion as being something real, I just try to savor it for what it is, ultimately.

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=HollywoodGolightly wrote:}{quote}

> > {quote:title=FredCDobbs wrote:}{quote}

> > I see both Garbo and Dietrich as being basically rather plain looking women who actually looked a lot alike and in fact acted alike and I think their appeal had to do with the specific mannerisms their early directors taught them to use, and of course their carefully trained voices.

>

> I think you're essentially right, in that a lot of the glamour of early Hollywood was a carefully manufactured illusion. Mind you, I don't think that was a bad thing - many people wanted illusions in their lives, especially during the Great Depression and during World War II.

 

Yes, that?s what I went to the movies to see. If I wanted ?reality?, I?d go outside the theater.

 

In fact, ?reality? was always what hit me in the face and enveloped me in its clutches when the movie was over and I had to leave the theater and go back ?out there..... into the world of reality?.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It always depends how one defines beauty, but talking about photography or cinematography both the photographer Clarence Sinclair Bull (who ptotographed Garbo for most of her career at MGM) as well as William Daniels attest to Garbo's extraordinary and perfect beauty. There are also many reports from people who have met Garbo in everyday life (with no make up or any fancy clothes) and report that her beauty was extraordinary (for example Cecil Beaton when he met Garbo again in New York in 1946 says that she was far more beautiful in person than the screen...as if that was possible).

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=HollywoodGolightly wrote:}{quote}

> And yet, at the same time, when I watch them in the movies I want to buy into the illusion, and want to imagine what it felt like at the time those movies were being released to watch them in the huge palace-like theaters of the time.

>

> So, I can see both sides of it I guess. The glamour of old Hollywood is an illusion that, if you want to buy into it, can be a fun distraction, something to take your mind off of other things.

>

> I don't for a minute buy the illusion as being something real, I just try to savor it for what it is, ultimately.

 

This reminds me of the time my first wife and I were watching a Basil Rathbone Sherlock Holmes movie on TV, back in the ?70s.

 

After a while, I said to her, ?I met him.?

 

She said, ?You met who??

 

I said, ?I met Sherlock Holmes.?

 

She said, ?Huh???

 

I said, ?I met him in the early ?60s when he came to our university on some kind of promotional tour..?

 

She said, ?You mean, you met Basil Rathbone.?

 

I said, ?Yeah, Sherlock Holmes.?

 

She said, ?No, you met Basil Rathbone.?

 

I said, ?That?s what I said, I met Sherlock Holmes.?

 

She looked at me like I was crazy.

 

I said, ?Well, he looked like Sherlock Holmes, he acted like Sherlock Holmes, although he was very quiet and not very talkative.... like it was near the end of his career and he hadn?t worked on a case in a long time, and he was a little embarrassed.?

 

She said, ?You mean Basil Rathbone??

 

I said, ?Yeah, Sherlock Holmes.?

 

Well, needless to say, my first wife didn?t know how to daydream, and she thought I was crazy.

 

Ok, so maybe I am crazy. But I really did meet Sherlock Holmes at my university in the early ?60s and I was so delighted to be in the same room with him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2021 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...